Open mouth, insert Desert Eagle

Rudy Giuliani chooses .50 caliber in blowing off the top of his presidential campaign:

Rudy Giuliani’s message to social conservatives: If you don’t like my views, don’t vote for me.

The Republican presidential frontrunner Thursday reaffirmed his support for federal funding for some abortions, a position which puts him at odds with many conservatives. During a press conference at the State Capitol in Columbia, South Carolina, he said he didn’t expect to win over 100 percent of the voters.

“If that’s real important to you, if that’s the most important thing, I’m comfortable with the fact that you won’t vote for me,” the former mayor said.

Yes, Republicans tend to do so very well when all the social conservatives stay home…. As I have written before, I don’t believe Giuliani seriously wants to win, or even win the nomination. Of course, it will be interesting to see how the “pragmatic” conservatives in the commentariat attempt to spin this, or if they finally come to their senses, throw up their hands, and give up the Lisper as a lost cause.

Needless to say, Mr. Regression to the Mean is having none of it:

With the mainstream media following along lapping it up and stressing the most extreme elements of the discussion to send the message to independent voters that right-wingers are all a bunch of lunatics who are obsessed with ideological purity and not with getting things done?

I think if they do, the GOP is sunk.

Getting things done. Which is to say, the federal government getting things done. You know, I’m not too terribly old, but even I can recall a time when Republicans were against the federal government getting things done.

The GOP sunk itself back in 1995. That 2003 peak was merely the prow of the ship arcing high into the sky preparatory to the forthcoming plunge deep into the electoral depths. If you thought 2006 was bad for Republicans, I suspect you haven’t seen anything yet. And given the migration patterns, it’s only going to get worse, those enthusiastic Red State breeders notwithstanding. It could easily be another 40 years before Republicans again gain control of the House and Senate.

That’s what pragmatism got you. Ironically, Republicans are attempting to find the cure by applying more of the disease.

No quid pro quo?

Methinks that someone is not telling the whole truth. I very much doubt that Mr Ahmadinejad is, but I also doubt the British Foreign Office is either.

The crisis ended after Mr Ahmadinejad said Britain had sent a letter to the Iranian Foreign Ministry pledging that it would not enter Iranian waters again. Britain continues to insist that the team was never in its territorial waters.

Although the Foreign Office would not discuss details of the diplomatic note it delivered over the weekend, Government sources said Britain was willing to prevent such confusion arising again over the sensitive maritime border between Iraq and Iran.

The Ministry of Defence says it has incontrovertible evidence that the eight sailors and seven Royal Marines were 1.7 nautical miles inside Iraqi waters when they were arrested during a search of an Indian vessel on March 23.

However, the Iranians have won a significant propaganda and political coup, according to John Bolton, the Right-wing former US Ambassador to the United Nations. They had conducted an experiment that was “a low-cost way of testing British resolve”, he said….

Despite the official denials of a deal, there were indications of intense diplomatic activity to persuade Teheran to release the hostages.

Iran’s official IRNA news agency reported yesterday that an Iranian representative was to meet five of his countrymen detained in Iraq by US forces in January. It follows the release on Tuesday of Jalal Sharafi, an Iranian diplomat who was captured by gunmen in Baghdad in February.

I’m sure that the one release following the other was just a happy coincidence. If my theory is correct, the five other detained Iranians will be quietly released within a month or so, once the press interest fades.

Mailvox: Anger and the Answer

MH has a few thoughts about angry women:

In a perfect world, women would respect their men and their men would love them back. This is as we have been commanded to do. Unfortunately men forget the love part or are unable to love their women and women have forgotten the respect part. This becomes a vicious cycle.

After reading “Wild at Heart” and “Captivating” by David Eldredge (I think that’s the authors name) and “Love and Respect” by Emerson Eggerich, my whole outlook on men, women and how we interact with each other has changed. A little sincere respect goes a long way with my husband. We watch, horrified, as his mother and stepfather live unhappily caught in that vicious cycle. His younger sister is afraid to marry because she does not want to have a marriage like her parents. My parents had a similar marriage.

Feminism has ruined everything for women. We are now responsible for pregnancy alone, it’s our fault if we become pregnant because we did not use birth control or more likely it failed. Men become angry if we don’t abort. They become angry if they are forced to support a child out of wedlock. The child is left without a strong father image and many times the cycle repeats in the next generation.

Girls today are looking for the male attention they lacked in childhood, they throw themselves at boys, one can hardly blame them for taking them up on the offer. Boys,having no responsible adult male role model, have no clue how to act around women. Many of them have no direction or motivation. Why should they? Many years ago, boys had to show they were responsible and could support a women if they wanted to get married. They could get sex from a whore but that’s not who they would want to raise their children, and most men at least wanted a boy child to carry on their name. Now there is no need for that when they can get whatever they want for free with no consequences except VD which they never think about until it’s too late.

Women finally settle for someone they think will make them happy but with all the baggage and no God in their lives, most of the time their relationship is doomed. They blame the men, but it’s much more complicated than that.

I guess I am angry, but not with my husband or men in general, but the results of feminism, which has created unrealistic expectations of both women and men. We are different and God meant it to be that way, so that we would complement each other.

After the fall, God said to Eve “Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you”. (Gen:3,16) In other words, women are forever longing for a deep relationship that includes talking with us. Men hate to talk but will do it when you give them respect. Only with Jesus in our marriage can we somewhat overcome this curse.

I disagree, actually. There will be genuine Christians with unhappy marriages, pagans with lasting and positive life-commitments and happy Hindus with multiple happy housewives. (Okay, I was just going with the alliteration on that last one, I don’t actually know if any Hindu sects are particularly prone to polygamy.)

There’s no question that submitting to Biblical principles is one of the most effective paths towards marital happiness. But marital happiness is not salvation and therefore Jesus Christ is not the only way to it. But for those who such lack happiness and seek it, it’s certainly worth a try.

Is it worth it?

An anonymous poster on Dr. Helen’s blog:

I am one of the angry women whose husband wants a divorce. I acknowlege that anger is my main problem. What no one here (and especially my stbx husband) seems to understand is that if you are an emotionally cold, distant, detached man who walks away from all conflict you will end up with a chronically angry and resentful wife who feels invalidated, disrespected and unheard.

My husband grew up in a family where “peace at any price” was the motto. His mother pays that price by manipulating,lying and kowtowing to his father. My children and I will now be paying that price for the rest of our lives while my husband finds peace without us.

This is an example of one of the more obviously doomed pairings, the angry woman and the peace-at-any-price man. However, the point that this woman appears to be missing is that this is the path she chose. Regardless of whether or not one likes the way one’s partner responds to provocation, one must recognize that this is a RESPONSE to one’s own action.

Every day, the opportunities for conflict present themselves, in our relationships, our personal lives and our professional lives. But it is a choice to provoke that conflict or to let it go. And while some conflicts are unavoidable and must be fought out, this is not true of the vast majority of them, especially those within a marriage.

I give Spacebunny the opportunity to engage in conflict every single day, what with my inability to know what day it is, let alone what petty household task I agreed to do last week. And nearly every time, she declines the opportunity. This is the hallmark of a self-disciplined woman who values her relationship, just as explosive outbursts over minor issues is the hallmark of an out-of-control woman who values her momentary feelings more than her relationship.

If people don’t want to be around you, the problem is you. If someone who used to enjoy being around you prefers to avoid you, then you would do well to examine if you are treating them differently than you were in the past.

Viva Roma

I’m not usually a big fan of police brutality, but occasionally one must make an exception:

ITALIAN riot police showed no mercy last night as they battered Manchester United fans in Rome. Officers used truncheons and tear gas on the Brits — in some of the most shocking football riot scenes in recent years. Cops wearing helmets and protective armour rained down blow after blow on fallen fans.

Of course, this was partially payback for the deaths at Heysel during the 1985 European Cup championships. The Italian police are not exactly what you’d call big fans of English football supporters at the best of times, and they’re definitely not inclined to genteel relations after the death of that policeman at the Catania-Palermo match earlier this year.

I suppose I should be appalled, really, but there’s something so inherently compelling about the notion of Manchester United thugs being violently beaten by all and sundry. It’s just too bad the police couldn’t beat on Cristiano Ronaldo while they were at it. That would be real value for your pay-per-view money.

I wasn’t watching, however, as I was at an important soccer match last night. Unfortunately, our prima squadra got knocked out of the quarterfinals of the cup competition on a very late goal that featured some very careless goaltending by our keeper. It was a respectable showing against a team two leagues up, however, so the guys did very well. We even had our own ultras beating drums and setting off flares, but they aren’t quite as intimidating as the Roman ultras since the oldest one is only ten years old.

I had to give my Dutch friend a hard time, as it was his son who was leading the kids in all the various cheers, chants and songs. “Did you teach him that one?” I asked him after one particularly rabble-rousing chant. “I don’t even understand what he is shouting,” he answered.

Tampa is still in the NFC, right?

From ProFootballTalk:

Which current NFL player is telling pals he is seriously considering coming out of the closet while he’s still on his NFC team?

I imagine that rumor has spurred more than a few Jeff Garcia jokes around the league of late. My money is on it being some second-stringer that practically no one has ever heard of, although for pure entertainment’s sake, I hope it’s Eli Manning.